Search the Community

Note: This thread started as a feature request but it became a bug report. The bug is this: when you copy and paste a table of contents, the new pasted TOC is given the same name as the original, and that causes problems. This problem is demonstrated in original video. The original discussion is left unedited below. --------------------------- I would like to request the ability to duplicate a table of contents for use elsewhere in the same document. Why? There could be scenarios where a similar type of TOC is used throughout the document. For example, I am working on a book where each chapter is preceded by an outline of that chapter including page numbers. I am using TOC to automatically produce the outline, and setting it up was fairly complex, so the ability to duplicate it would be useful. In the current version of Publisher (1.8.3), it is possible to copy and paste a TOC, but the process is buggy. I post here in the feature request rather than a bug report because I suspect it never was intended to be able to do it that way. Whatever the case, I have made a video demonstrating some of the difficulty with copying and pasting a TOC. I actually recorded this 11 times with somewhat varying results each time, so I am still not quite sure how to explain what isn't working, but I suspect the main problem (or perhaps even the source of all the others) is that the name of the TOC is duplicated identically, so that you end up with two of the same name, and it is not clear how fix that problem once it happens. Sometimes I am able to get the duplicated TOC to still work as I want despite the name, and other times the duplicated TOC still shows the content from the original even after updating all TOCs. copy_TOC.mov I am attaching the sample document used in the video in two ways: the state it was in as I began the video (start.afpub), and secondly the step just before the end of the video (I undid the last step where I deleted a TOC) (end.afpub). Perhaps this is just a bug that can be patched up, or perhaps something different will need to be done. At the very least, I do suggest removing the possibility to get a document in this state.